Manuscript Checker for First-Time Authors
Avoid the most common first-submission mistakes that lead to desk rejection, automated checking for every first-time journal author.
Check my manuscript, it's freeNo account required · Results in <2 minutes · PDF, Word & LaTeX
The first submission challenge
First-time journal authors face a steep learning curve. Journal submission requirements are rarely taught explicitly in graduate school, and mistakes that experienced authors avoid automatically are common pitfalls for new submitters, incomplete abstracts, missing declarations, inconsistent citations, metadata errors, and formatting violations. CheckMyManuscript provides a safety net that catches these issues automatically, giving first-time authors the same pre-submission quality check that experienced researchers have internalized over years of submissions.
Most common first-submission mistakes we catch
Incomplete abstract
Missing methods or results from the abstract, extremely common in first papers.
Missing declarations
Forgotten conflict of interest, funding, or ethics statements.
Citation-reference mismatches
References cited but not listed, or listed but not cited.
Wrong section order
IMRaD structure violated, Discussion before Results, etc.
Missing author metadata
Affiliations, ORCID IDs, or corresponding author missing.
Informal language
Conversational phrases and contractions that editors flag immediately.
Checks relevant to this topic
Part of our 80+ automated checks
Abstract completeness
Background, objective, methods, results, conclusion all present.
Required declarations
Conflict of interest, funding, ethics statements.
Citation matching
In-text citations match bibliography exactly.
Section order
IMRaD structure correctly ordered.
The practical edge your peers already use
Across disciplines and career stages, researchers reduce bottlenecks and submit with confidence: clearer drafts, easier guideline compliance, and less back and forth with co‑authors and reviewers.
I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.
Ilyass
Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal
I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.
Manon
Master's Student in Speech Therapy
I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.
Afonso
PhD Candidate, UFPE
It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.
Félix
Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology
A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.
Oleg
Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
I use it to review my students' papers. It instantly highlights typos, missing references, and unclear sections, helping me focus my feedback on the quality of the research instead of surface errors.
Ilyass
Professor in Mechanical Engineering, ÉTS Montréal
I relied on it throughout my thesis to strengthen my writing. It suggested clearer phrasing, improved flow between sections, and ensured my references were complete before the final deadline.
Manon
Master's Student in Speech Therapy
I write research in both Portuguese and English, and it adapts perfectly to either language. It provided precise feedback in Portuguese, helping me maintain academic tone and consistency across my drafts.
Afonso
PhD Candidate, UFPE
It gave excellent advice on how to rephrase and present ideas more clearly and concisely. The suggestions helped me refine my arguments and make my research more impactful.
Félix
Postdoc Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Biology
A round of suggestions helped to generally refine the text of my paper and, moreover, to present some of its key points in a more focused form.
Oleg
Professor, Pirogov Russian National Research Medical University
Frequently asked questions
Start by reading the 'Instructions for Authors' on your target journal's website. Then check your manuscript with CheckMyManuscript to validate technical requirements. Our journal submission checklist guide has a step-by-step walkthrough.
Desk rejection is when an editor rejects your paper before peer review, usually for formatting violations, incomplete submissions, or scope mismatch. CheckMyManuscript catches formatting and completeness issues; scope alignment is something you need to assess manually.
Editorial review (before peer review) typically takes 1-2 weeks. Peer review varies widely: 1-3 months is typical, but can be longer at high-prestige journals.